Selection errors tally thread

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Not happy with the Prince being shelved obviously, but like I said, not sure Watto will open anyway. Gives me a reason to watch though, been struggling to give a **** enough to watch with Hughes having an average stay at the crease of 51 seconds. Hopefully Watto will at least double that.

 

[Pigeon]

Aussie selectors are a joke really.

Dropping a guy because he had well 3 bad innings? Wow. But then what were they doing by retaining a certain Mike Hussey for eons when he was hardly scoring anything? Surprising.

The most stupid decision was to go in without a reserve opener, now they have to resort to makeshift ones, and my gut feeling is that Hussey will open, which is only going to accelerate the chaos within the Aussie ranks.

And @ inclusion of Johnson in the squad. Different yardsticks for different men surely.

 

[nightprowler10]

Came here as soon as I read about Hughes on CI. Unfortunate for the young lad really. Who will open with Katich then if not Watto. And yeah it doesn't seem quite fair that Hughes got the shaft already despite not looking horrible whereas Johnson gets a reprieve.

 

[Burgey]

Nah, reckon if Watson plays he'll open. They've made mention in different interviews about combatting Flintoff's ability v left-handers.

 

[Top_Cat]

Aussie selectors are a joke really.

Dropping a guy because he had well 3 bad innings? Wow. But then what were they doing by retaining a certain Mike Hussey for eons when he was hardly scoring anything? Surprising.

The most stupid decision was to go in without a reserve opener, now they have to resort to makeshift ones, and my gut feeling is that Hussey will open, which is only going to accelerate the chaos within the Aussie ranks.

And @ inclusion of Johnson in the squad. Different yardsticks for different men surely.

Same in every team at every level since time immemorial.

 

[Nate]

Not hugely against the decision tbh. Can definately see Watson being a matchwinner. Can also see him getting hit by the coin at the toss and being out for 6-12.

 

[Craig]

Not hugely against the decision tbh. Can definately see Watson being a matchwinner. Can also see him getting hit by the coin at the toss and being out for 6-12.

He will do his back whilst putting on his pads.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

Dropping Hughes makes sense TBH. Suffering from a technical issue, not a 'form slump', and 1-down in the ashes series leaves no room for him to fix it.

He's young with plenty of time on his side to iron out his game and come back.

Reminds me of Tim Southee a bit, had a great start to tests, but just not quite the finished article, talent to burn but needs to tighten up his game.

Unsure about leaving Clark out though

 

[GIMH]

Well it's still to be absolutely confirmed but apparently Hughes has been dropped for Watson, who will open.

OK, before Watson has the chance to score 287* and make this diabolical decision appear a masterstroke in the minds of those who judge a selection purely on whether it was successful or not... who seriously believes that this decision is the right one?

Personally I can barely think of something that has less going for it in preferring as a Test opener a man who has done nothing of note on the tiny handful of occasions he's opened for his state to someone who has had basically a single bad Test after scoring runs at every level he's ever played at, as an opener?

I find it odd that one of the alleged reasons for Johnson's retention is what dropping him would do to his confidence, yet a young opener who is undoubtedly hugely talented won't have his confidence knocked after being dropped for an all-rounder? And this after seeming to play himself back into some form in the practice match at Northants. Dunno, find this odd.

 

[Uppercut]

Watson's in great form, and Hughes is in horrendous form. Even allowing for the fact that Hughes is more talented, has more experience opening in FC cricket and has been playing in English conditions all summer... I still think Watson will score more runs. The ball's hitting the middle of the bat for him, and it's not for Hughes.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

He needs experience, not necessarily at test level, and needs to fix an issue with his technique, and the two somewhat go hand in hand. And he is 20. And he's hardly a fixture in the team.

If this dropping turns him into a mental wreck from which he doesn't recover, he probably isn't test match batsman material anyway. However there every chance it will actually do him some good, give him some more hunger.

 

[Uppercut]

I find it odd that one of the alleged reasons for Johnson's retention is what dropping him would do to his confidence, yet a young opener who is undoubtedly hugely talented won't have his confidence knocked after being dropped for an all-rounder? And this after seeming to play himself back into some form in the practice match at Northants. Dunno, find this odd.

Watson's a batsman in his own right tbf. By all accounts his bowling is a non-issue at the moment.

 

[GIMH]

It's the hypocrisy of the situation that gets me a bit, Clark is clearly bowling better than Johnson. But no selectorial team around the world acts consistently I guess.

Bottom line, even though we've made him struggle, I'd feel more wary of Hughes than Watson, at the top.

Interestingly when me and Smitteh discussed Watto's run prospects in this Test (this was when it seemed he might get a gig at 6) he reckoned he might struggle against Freddie but I said, no he'll be set, I don't think he'll face Freddie. Looks like I was wrong.

Hey, it will be interesting, it's not the decision I'd have made but being a selector is a paid job for a reason, otherwise you could just run a poll on sites like this to get the teams picked...

 

[GIMH]

Watson's a batsman in his own right tbf. By all accounts his bowling is a non-issue at the moment.

Yeah, that's fair enough, although don't you think they want the 5th bowler in there in case Johnson can't land it on the strip?

 

[Son Of Coco]

I find it odd that one of the alleged reasons for Johnson's retention is what dropping him would do to his confidence, yet a young opener who is undoubtedly hugely talented won't have his confidence knocked after being dropped for an all-rounder? And this after seeming to play himself back into some form in the practice match at Northants. Dunno, find this odd.

I don't find it just odd, I find it remarkable. Jettison one guy who has admittedly been in average form to reshuffle the squad so you can accommodate a guy who is in horrendous form. If Johnson hadn't of been picked again I wouldn't see it as such a strange move.

 

[Uppercut]

It's the hypocrisy of the situation that gets me a bit, Clark is clearly bowling better than Johnson. But no selectorial team around the world acts consistently I guess.

Bottom line, even though we've made him struggle, I'd feel more wary of Hughes than Watson, at the top.

Interestingly when me and Smitteh discussed Watto's run prospects in this Test (this was when it seemed he might get a gig at 6) he reckoned he might struggle against Freddie but I said, no he'll be set, I don't think he'll face Freddie. Looks like I was wrong.

Hey, it will be interesting, it's not the decision I'd have made but being a selector is a paid job for a reason, otherwise you could just run a poll on sites like this to get the teams picked...

I don't find it just odd, I find it remarkable. Jettison one guy who has admittedly been in average form to reshuffle the squad so you can accommodate a guy who is in horrendous form. If Johnson hadn't of been picked again I wouldn't see it as such a strange move.

Yeah, good points all. My opinion on Johnson is well-documented, and he should not be in the team at the moment.

But I'm trying to judge this decision independent of that. Considering that Watson's bowling is not currently up to scratch, the only question you have to ask yourself is who will score more runs in this match? When you boil it down to that, it's debateable- certainly not the horrendous shocker some are saying- and personally, my money would be on Watto.

 

[Halfpast_Yellow]

I guess they're banking on Johnson being better 1st change than Clark. Perhaps the pitch has something to do with it + and a dash of hope he comes right?

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, good points all. My opinion on Johnson is well-documented, and he should not be in the team at the moment.

But I'm trying to judge this decision independent of that. Considering that Watson's bowling is not currently up to scratch, the only question you have to ask yourself is who will score more runs in this match? When you boil it down to that, it's debateable- certainly not the horrendous shocker some are saying- and personally, my money would be on Watto.

You might back Watto to score my runs but do you back him to score more opening?

I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just that a couple of weeks ago when there were suggestions of him opening, they were laughed out of the forum

 

[Uppercut]

You might back Watto to score my runs but do you back him to score more opening?

I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just that a couple of weeks ago when there were suggestions of him opening, they were laughed out of the forum

Yeah, you know, I probably do. Opening is primarily a mindset change in comparison to batting at 3 or 4, where a great deal of the time you'll face every test of technique that an opener faces. So long as Watson's happy to open, and he's done so very well in other forms of the game, I don't see it being a massive problem. It's unlikely to be a long-term fix, but he'll do the job.

The other thing is, Phil Hughes probably isn't going to score any runs, and the opportunity to line someone up and smack them on the head with a rock-hard new cherry every innings has to be good for the English bowlers' momentum. There's not a massive amount to lose here in the short-term, and in the long term, who cares? It's the ****ing Ashes.

 

[GIMH]

If Watto fails and we win, people won't be talking about there being no short-term damage. If we win here, that's the Ashes I reckon. Brave gamble from the crim selectors tbf.

It just goes to show, though, that there is no science to selection and you can never ever categorically declare a selectorial decision to be an error.